Holly House Residential Home

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 69 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. The provider conducted thorough analysis of incidents, to identify the cause and share any lessons learnt with staff to prevent it from happening again. A staff member told us, “After the incident, we always have team meetings where we discuss what happened, what went wrong, and what we can do to prevent it happening again.” and “Changes are always implemented, such as additional training, updated procedures, or increased monitoring to ensure the safety and wellbeing of everyone.” Relatives told us they felt confident the right action would be taken in the event of an accident or incident.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services. The provider regularly reviewed people’s care and support plans to ensure these were fully up to date and reflective of people’s needs. This enabled staff to provide up to date information to healthcare partners when required.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately. Staff were trained in safeguarding and understood their responsibilities in reporting safeguarding concerns. The provider reported safeguarding concerns to the appropriate authorities. People told us they felt safe living at the service and relatives feedback confirmed this.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. Risks to people had been assessed on an individual basis with plans and strategies in place to reduce those risks. People at risk of developing pressure sores had pressure relieving equipment in place to lower this risk and mobility equipment was in place for people at the risk of falls. However, we observed staff did not always identify risks and take action to ensure peoples’ safety. For example, we observed a person being placed at risk of injury as staff supporting them to move in a wheelchair had not ensured the person’s continence aid was safely positioned. Another member of staff intervened to ensure the person’s safety.

The provider carried out checks of the environment to ensure people’s safety and identify any required improvements and actions. Staff received training and competency checks in fire safety and procedures. However, the provider did not always detect and control potential risks in the care environment. For example, during our inspection we found not all windows had restrictors in place to minimise the risk of people falling from height. The provider took immediate action to address this during our inspection.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. Staff received training to carry out their roles safely and effectively. A relative told us, “I find them (staff) incredibly well trained in everything that they do.” The provider carried out competency checks to ensure staffs understanding and identify where further training was needed. A staff member told us, “We get regular training, and it is practical and easy to understand. If I don’t understand something, they (the provider) explain again with patience. It helps me improve my work.” Staff told us there was enough staff on shift to meet people’s needs and ensure people’s safety. A staff member said, “We (staff) help each other and work like a team.”

The provider assessed the risk of infection and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. Staff had received training in infection prevention and control and staff wore the appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) when supporting people. During our inspection, the home, including people’s bedrooms and communal areas, appeared mostly clean with no malodours. The provider had systems in place to assess the risk of infection. This included regular checks and audits to identify areas for improvement. However, during our inspection we found drinking cups in some people’s rooms that were discoloured, which had not been identified through these checks.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened. People’s medicines were administered safely by trained and competent staff. The provider had systems in place to ensure people’s medicines were ordered and stored appropriately and safely. Staff reviewed people’s prescribed medicines to ensure they met the persons needs and involved the appropriate professionals when required.